The US media still largely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year. As a result, most Americans are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East. In fact they were one of the first countries to have spontaneous candlelight vigils after the 911 tragedy (see photo).

There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. I began these daily threads June 10th 2003. On that date Iranians once again began taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Today in Iran, most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy.

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.

In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.

This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.

I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.

If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.

If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.

'Democratic' Iran army wants to observe US polls

Tehran, Iran

18 October 2004 15:49

Iran's hard-line Basij militia has written to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan to ask if the Islamic republic can send observers to the United States presidential election in November, a government newspaper said on Monday.

"By this symbolic request, we want to ridicule the so-called democratic slogans of the American leaders," a Basij official, Said Toutunshian, told the Iranian newspaper.

"We want to say to the whole world that the presence of observers from the Islamic republic of Iran, the most democratic regime in the world, is necessary to guarantee the smooth running of the American elections."

The Basij is a volunteer army attached to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, the Islamic republic's ideological army.

Predominantly Western groups frequently send observers to pass judgement on the "democratic status" of elections in other countries.

On Monday, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe said in a statement that weekend legislative elections in Belarus fell "significantly short" of democratic standards.apa-AFP

3
posted on 10/19/2004 12:59:38 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Iran ran away with the bomb

By Arnold Beichman

U.S. in talks with Europeans on a nuclear deal with Iran  New York Times, Oct. 12.G-8 nations to meet on Iran  The Washington Post, Oct. 15.

Well, the talks and meetings will go on and on to the next Ramadan and the Ramadan after that and Iran will go on working on its nuclear arms program until it has the Bomb. There will be no deal with Iran no matter how costly nuclear bomb manufacture might be. With oil prices going through the roof, money is not a problem now nor in the foreseeable future.

The Washington Post report said the Group of Eight countries  the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Russia and Canada  would threaten punitive measures if Iran refused to abandon its nuclear arms program. The New York Times reported the U.S. was talking with its European allies on "a possible package of economic incentives for Iran" if only Iran would suspend its uranium enrichment activities.

Incentives? Hah. Iran is the second-largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and holds 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves and the second-largest (after Russia) natural gas reserves.

Incentives? Hah. Iran earns an estimated $900 million for every $1 per barrel increase in the price of its oil. And with oil up in the $50+ per barrel range, Iran is awash in cash and can do what it wants as bomb maker and bomb supplier.

Incentives? The only incentives that might matter would be the threat of sanctions. Who has the will to push for sanctions? France, Germany? Hah. Who has the power, let alone the will, to enforce sanctions if they ever came to a Security Council vote?

There will be no deal with Iran no matter how much they talk the talk and promise the promise. Iran is awash in money that Western Europe, particularly France, covets.

As far as I can see, it's all going Iran's way. Iran is stronger today than a decade ago. Iran emerged bloody and very unbowed in 1988 from its eight-year war with Iraq, a war that cost 1 million lives. Henry Kissinger supposedly said during that war "too bad they can't both lose." It didn't work out that way. Iraq lost and Iran won right up to this very minute.

Iran is today the dominant land power in the Middle East militarily and economically. As leader of Shi'ite Islam, Iran must be delighted at the war in Iraq, which is killing off the rival Sunnis. With its new missiles, Iran has shown it could project its power far from home, and not only by financing the Hezbollah terror squads. The Iranian people may be unhappy with the clerical dictatorship but there is little they can now do about it.

Far more serious, Iran undertook its nuclear program in September 2002 under a decree of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and is on its way to being a nuclear power if not one already. And as far as I can see, nobody can stop Iran despite a resolution by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted last September which called upon Iran "immediately [to] suspend all enrichment-related activities."

According to an Iranian exile resistance group, Iran has secret sites all over the country engaged in nuclear activity. One secret site at Arak, about 154 miles southwest of Tehran, produces heavy water and plutonium. A sufficiently powerful heavy water reactor can be used to turn uranium into bomb-usable plutonium without requiring enrichment facilities. In Isfahan, there is the Center of Nuclear Research. There are other sites about which little is known. These plants are capable of producing three nuclear weapons a year.

Iran seems unstoppable. It has lots of scientific talent at home and abroad for hire, lots of theological-imperial ambitions, lots of money, lots of eager sellers and money lenders in the European Union and in Russia. And that's how wars begin.

Arnold Beichman, a Hoover Institution research fellow, is a columnist for The Washington Times. His updated biography "Herman Wouk, the Novelist as Social Historian," has just been published.

4
posted on 10/19/2004 1:00:27 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Irans satellite: a look at the implications

by Taylor DinermanMonday, October 18, 2004

Recently, the Iranian military announced that it has successfully tested a 2000-km range missile, the Shahab 5, and the Tehran government has also said that, in April of 2005, they plan to launch the Islamic Republics first satellite. This, combined with the mounting evidence that their nuclear program is accelerating, indicates that we are headed for a major crisis next year. During the debates, both Bush and Kerry talked as if they will be able to stop Irans drive for nuclear weapons and the long-range ballistic missiles to deliver them, if not with diplomacy and sanctions, then with force. If they mean what they say, there is going to be trouble ahead.

From inside Iran, a 2000-km missile will be able to hit, to the west, Greece, Turkey, parts of the Balkans, and the parts of Ukraine. To the east, it will cover all of Pakistan and major parts of India. To the south, it will not only be able to target Saudi Arabia, but Yemen, Eritrea and Djibouti, as well. To the north, not only will the nations of the Caucasus and Central Asia be within range, but major parts of Russia, as well. The capability of this weapon is far beyond what is needed for a strike against Israel. This missile, and its longer range successors that are already in development are part of a major asymmetric arms buildup.

The purpose of this effort is, in the first place, to safeguard the Mullahs position at home, where they are under challenge from a generation of young people who reject the Islamic revolution and the dictatorship it has created. Second, it is intended to provide an umbrella for the extension of their power into Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf, through the use of surrogates, such as Al Sadr and Gulbaddin Hekmatyr.

If Iran can build and test a nuclear weapon, and prove that it has the capability to build and launch a satellite, even a small one, it will join a new category of states that could be referred to as mini-superpowers.

Irans drive for nuclear weapons is obviously not going to be stopped because the Europeans or the Russian ask them to. The Mullahs believe that they need nuclear weapons not only to deploy against the US and Israel but also to safeguard their own regime. This does not mean that they are going to blow up one of their own cities if the locals get out of line, but it does mean that they want the prestige and the burst of nationalist pride that the Indians and Pakistanis got when their governments tested nuclear weapons in the 1990s.They may also hope that the West will fear that, if the regime is overthrown, the ensuing chaos might lead to a loose nukes situation.

Under the Shah, Iran not only bought billions of dollars worth of western weapons, but also arranged for thousands of Iranian students to study science and engineering in the US and elsewhere. Many of these students stayed in the West, but thousands of others went back to Iran. Some of them, or people trained by them, are no doubt working on the Mullahs nuclear weapons and on the means to deliver them.

If Iran can build and test a nuclear weapon, and prove that it has the capability to build and launch a satellite, even a small one, it will join a new category of states that could be referred to as mini-superpowers. A nation that can launch a satellite can theoretically build an ICBM. Israel and India are members of this club. Pakistan has not yet launched a satellite but has indicated that it plans to do so. Nations as diverse as Brazil, North Korea, South Korea, South Africa, and Japan all have tried, at one time, for membership. Having a satellite in orbit and a bomb in the basement gives a government options, and a certain amount of room to maneuver than states without that capability would have.

During its war with Iraq, despite a larger population and greater strategic depth, Iran was nonetheless fought to a standstill, due to Saddam's access to better weapons, from the USSR, France, China, Brazil and elsewhere (The US supplied less than 1% of Saddams weapons, mostly training helicopters and Chevy Blazers) and to his massive use of poison gas. The Islamic Republic learned to modify and to adapt the American and British weapons it had inherited from the Shah. The ability to keep even a small part of these systems in operation is not to be dismissed.

To imagine, as some analysts do, that Iran is technologically dependent on Russia, North Korea, China, or Pakistan for its nuclear missile and satellite program is surely a mistake. The Shah was an exceptionally ambitious ruler and he laid the groundwork for Iran to develop a sophisticated and capable armaments industry. The requirements of the 1980-1987 war forced them to build on this foundation. Unless great care is taken, the Mullahs military may reserve some nasty surprises for anyone who goes against them.

Fortunately, all reports indicate that the regime in place is at least as unpopular as that of the Shah during his last days. Indications of unrest are all over the Internet and even reach into the mainstream press. Sadly, this may not be enough to overthrow the Mullahs any time soon.

So the US has got to begin developing some alternative plans for dealing with Iran. The US Army and Marine Corps may be fully engaged in Iraq, but the Air Force and Navy have plenty of spare capacity that could be used if diplomacy fails. Effectively targeting these forces against Irans bomb program and its supporting infrastructure is an exceptionally tough problem for the Pentagons and Centcoms Joint Planning Staff.

If the US does nothing, then it is quite possible that, within a decade, Iran will have nuclear-tipped missiles that can hit not only Israel and Europe, but America itself. To counter that threat, the US will need a far more effective missile defense system than the one it has today. Only space-based boost phase interceptors, combined with a real multi-layered defense system, could hope to negate the threat.

The final option is to develop and deploy space-based weapons capable of destroying Irans missiles and satellite launchers. This means accepting the weaponization of space, something that the Bush Administration seems to be trying to avoid dealing with.

So the US and the West are faced with three exceptionally unpalatable choices. First, they could continue down the diplomatic path. This is currently being pursued, but since the Mullahs are obviously playing for time, this merely means that they will get their full capability. The second possibility is a full scale bombing campaign lasting weeks or months, designed to wear down the regime and destroy their nuclear program. This has some obvious drawbacks for regional stability. The regime would strike back with all the terror apparatus at its disposal. Such an attack, combined with the right political action, might lead to a democratic revolution in Tehran, but no one should count on such an outcome.

The final option is to develop and deploy space-based weapons capable of destroying Irans missiles and satellite launchers as they struggle to leave the atmospherebasically, new versions of Brilliant Pebbles. This means accepting the weaponization of space, something that the Bush Administration seems to be trying to avoid dealing with.

As with North Korea, Irans drive for mini-superpower status leaves the US and its allies with no easy options. Whatever short-term strategy is chosen, the only real solution may be in the hands of the Iranian people themselves. The sooner they get rid of their rulers, the less they will suffer, and the sooner they will be able to rejoin the world as a normal nation.

Taylor Dinerman is editor and publisher of SpaceEquity.com.

6
posted on 10/19/2004 1:01:26 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Nemazee has served on the Board of the American Iranian Council, the Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC), and the Asia Society, all of which favor negotiations with the mullahs' regime and eventual normalization of relations with Iran.

A group of Iranian-Americans formed the Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran (SMCCDI) in 1997 to oppose the radical Islamic regime. Last year they wrote an open letter calling on Senator Edward Kennedy to disassociate himself with the then-newly-formed Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC), which they described as a "lobby group for a terrorist regime." The letter, signed by SMCCDI coordinator Aryo B. Pirouznia, described Hassan Nemazee as a "discredited and well-known individual who's seeking to legitimize the tyrannical Islamic Republic regime," and stated that "Nemazee's agenda and ultimate goal has been the promotion and support of relations with it."

The characterization of Nemazee as "discredited" seems to stem from some extremely dubious business dealings outlined in a 1999 Forbes Magazine article titled Warning Flags. Nemazee, then a Clinton Administration appointee for the position of U.S. Ambassador to Argentina, withdrew his name from consideration for that post shortly after the Forbes article was published.

Nemazee filed suit against the SMCCDI and Aryo Pirouznia, alleging defamation of character and denying the charge that he was an agent of the Iranian regime who was promoting that regime's interests in the U.S. The SMCCDI responded with a counter-suit against Nemazee.

In the first presidential debate on September 30, 2004, Senator Kerry said:

"With respect to Iran, the British, French, and Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran. I believe we could have done better. I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together."

On October 14, Aryo Pirouznia and his representatives held a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, at which they accused Nemazee and the Kerry campaign of trying to delay answering questions about his influence on the Kerry campaign until after the election. Aryo Pirouznia introduced himself as the coordinator of an organization "focused on freedom in my homeland." Attorney Bob Jenevein explained that neither Nemazee nor the Kerry campaign had responded to repeated requests for information. Dr. Jerry Corsi, co-author of the #1 best-seller "Unfit for Command" announced that he is working with Aryo B. Pirouznia on a new a book, Atomic Islam. He excoriated Kerry for offering nuclear fuel to Iran, noting that "the State Department has classified the Islamic regime in Tehran and the most avid state-sponsor of terrorism in the world today." Insight Magazine reporter and author Kenneth Timmerman charged that the Kerry campaign had violated the law by taking contributions from Susan Akbarpour, a pro-regime fund-raised who was neither a citizen nor possessed a green card at that time. A complete transcript of the press conference can be found here.

In Just naive, or breathtakingly stupid? Dr. Jerome Corsi noted that Kerry supports all three goals of the regime's lobbyists: 1) to normalize diplomatic and economic relations, 2) to include Iran in the World Trade Organization, and 3) to give Iran access to nuclear fuel.

Kenneth Timmerman expanded on his press conference remarks on Kerry's support for the regime's agenda in Kerry's Iran Scandal.

Nemazee was formally deposed on October 18th, saying, remarkably, that normalizing relations with Iran would be a mistake, that Iran should not be trusted with nuclear materials, and that he favors regime change -- see Kerry Iranian fund-raiser repudiates him on Tehran.

Where does the story go from here? Does each quo have a corresponding quid? Stay tuned...

-----

Mr. Nemazee, third from left, John Kerry and others at a fundraiser at the Ritz Carlton in San Francisco.

Mr. Nemazee and Mr. Kerry dine at the fundraiser on June 1, 2002.

7
posted on 10/19/2004 1:02:00 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

EXPECTED TO WIN, KARZAI WOULD HAVE TO WORK WITH OPPONENTS

KABOL, 18 Oct. (IPS) First results from Afghanistan's first presidential election put incumbent President Hamid Karzai in the lead, according to the Joint Electoral Management Board (JEMB), that gave the present Prime Minister 62.9%, ten per cent lower than the first return of the votes.

With almost one million out of the total estimated poll of seven million votes counted, Yunes Qanooni, the former Education Minister and Karzais main rival got 18.3% of the votes, or up 2 per cent. Sixteen other candidates shared the remaining 24% of the vote.

Voting turned out to be more or less democratic, heralding new era of peace and prosperity in the counry ravaged by decades of fratricide war, occupation and bloody insurgency.

The vote counting started on Thursday, but was halted for one day to mark the beginning of the month of Ramazan, Muslims fasting period, but resumed on Saturday and with 34,078 votes counted in five provinces, about 1 percent of the expected total, the American and Europeans-backed Karzai was declared the big winner.

But Qanooni said a full count and a proper investigation by a panel of foreign experts on fraud allegations could yet put him in the running. He said his acceptance of the final results depends on the thoroughness of the probe.

"If they are able to separate the fraud from the wishes of the people, at that time we will see if the election is legitimate," he said. "Anything else is a coup."

Contrary to many expectations, the elections took place in a relatively calm atmosphere and according to almost all foreign observers, voting turned out to be more or less democratic, heralding, as many Afghans hopes, new era of peace in the rugged land, ravaged by decades of fratricide war, occupation and bloody insurgency.Abdol Rashid Dostom, the governor of the northern province of Mazar Sharif scored 10.1 percent followed by the Hazara chief Mohammed Mohaqeq with 1.6 percent and Mrs. Masooda Jalal, the only female candidate in the race, who had 1.4 percent. The other 13 presidential candidates all had less that 1.1 percent of the ballots.

"Counting has begun again everywhere -- in all eight regional counting centres", said Afghan electoral commission spokesman Aykut Tavsel. Officials have to retrieve ballot boxes from remote villages and then mix up the ballots so nobody will know how a given village or district voted, an attempt to protect voters from Taleban retaliation that will take as long as a fortnight.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the Afghan-born US Ambassador to Kabol warned that it could takeup to 10 years for Afghanistan to become a successful democratic state.

US President George W. Bush, several worlds leading nations as well as the international community hailed the election as a success. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said it showed that democracy was also possible in Iraq.

But Mr. Zalmay Khalilzad, the Afghan-born US Ambassador to Kabol warned that it could takeup to 10 years for Afghanistan to become a successful democratic state.

"I think Afghanistan is firmly heading in the right direction. I think the Afghan people would like to succeed", he added after meeting with US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The Envoy also praised Afghans for voting despite threats from al Qaeda and Taleban insurgents, but stressed that it would take time to build the Afghan army and police force to a size necessary to maintain security for the country.

"Time could take as long as 10 years for it to be a truly successful country in terms of its security, in terms of economic development, in terms of being a successful democratic state", Mr. Khalilzad told reporters, adding, "If the journey of Afghanistan standing on its own feet, being a successful country, is a 10-mile journey, Afghanistan has just, in my view, passed mile three".

This exercise is the beginning of a long road where the international community must fully play its vital role for the reconstruction of the war-ravaged nation, for Afghanistan can easily go back to anarchy, said Andrew Wilder, Director of Afghanistan Research Unit Centre based in Kabol, observing that the senior warlords continue their control of most parts of the mountainous nation.

Badly deceived by 3 years of inefficient governance, the Afghans wants new abd bold personalities, not the statu quo, Wilder added. More than for the personality of Karzai, the Afghans voted for a lasting peace and prosperity, said Francoise Chipaux, the Correspondent of the French influential daily Le Monde covering Afghanistan.

However, the elections were marred by allegations of fraud and mismanagement after the ink supposed to be indelible after marking voters fingers in order to prevent multiple voting, was found to be easily washable.

In their view, if he present trend of vote counting continue in favour of Karazi, the Prime Minister would have call on some of his opponents to form his new government, personalities like Qanooni, Dostom, the Uzbek war lord, mrs. Massouda Jalal, the only female canidate or Esmail Khan, the former Emir of Heart. But Qanooni has told the American news agency The Associated Press that he might prefer forming a strong opposition part instead of joining the government.

Candidates opposed to Mr. Karzai complained that the ink was deliberately used to favour Karzai and menaced to boycott the elections unless the whole process of voting is renewed.

An international panel of experts appointed at the last minute to investigate the complaints ruled out new elections but said it would look into the allegations of vote rigging.

Analysts say that if the trend continues, Karzai would have to bring into his future government some of his majors opponents, starting with Mr. Qanooni, the Tajik chief who enjoys great popularity for being a close friend of the late Ahmad Shah Masoud, the legendary warlord assassinated by Arab terrorists sent by Osama Ben Laden, al-Qaedas leader.

Until now, Karzai has not convinced the international community nor the Afghan people, Ms. Chipaux wrote, adding however that since he would have to govern in the absence of the parliament, due to be elected next spring, Karzai will have all the powers, if not the instruments to fulfil his promises.

After election, Karzai would have no excuse of not putting into application his promises, if not, he would be rejected by the population, said Hoseyn Sangcharkhi, an independent Afghan analyst.

ENDS AFGHAN ELECTIONS 181004

8
posted on 10/19/2004 1:02:42 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Historical Churches in Iran

The majority of churches in Iran that possess historical and artistic value were built around the eight century A.H. or the 14th century AD, and the period thereafter. Of course, this does not mean that there were no churches existing in the country before that period.

During the reign of Shah Abbas, the Safavid king, his sagacious policies caused a sizable number of Armenians from Armenia and Azerbaijan to transfer and settle in Isfahan and other regions of Iran. A place called Jolfa was built at the banks of the Zayande-rud River in Esfahan and became the residence of these migrating people. Consequently, churches were erected in that town. Meanwhile, after a short lapse of time, some Armenians moved to Gilan and some resided in Shiraz.

After the death of Shah Abbas the First, his successor, Shah Abbas the Second, also paid close attention to the welfare of Armenians and more churches were erected in Jolfa.

The influx of many Europeans during the reign of the Qajars led to the flourishing of other churches, in addition to those that were constructed previously. A number of these edifices have lasted and acquired architectural and artistic significance.

Azarbaijan is host to the oldest churches in Iran. Among the most significant are the Tatavous Vank ( St. Tatavous Cathedral), which is also called the Ghara Kelissa (the black monastery). This is located at the Siahcheshmeh (Ghara-Eini) border area south of Makou. There is also the church known as Saint Stepanous, which stands 24 kilometers south of Azarbaijan's Jolfa town.

Generally, each church has a large hall for congregational prayers; its foremost part is raised like a dais, adorned with the pictures or images of religious figures and it also serves as an altar. Here, candles are lighted and the church mass is conducted by the priest. On the foreground is the praying congregation which face the platform where the priest is leading the rites in the church; this is similar to the Muslim practice of praying facing the niche in the mosque. While the mass is being said, the people stand, kneel, or sit depending on what the rites require.

The structure of churches in Iran follow more or less the pattern of Iranian architecture, or they are a mixture of Iranian and non-Iranian designs.

Saint Stepanous church is another old church located at an intersection west of the Marand-Jolfa highway and east of the Khoy-Jolfa road. Also having a pyramidal dome, it is, nevertheless, quite beautiful and far more pleasant to behold than the Saint Tatavous church.

The general structure mostly resembles Armenian and Georgian architecture and the inside of the building is adorned with beautiful paintings by Honatanian, a renowned Armenian artist. Hayk Ajimian, an Armenian scholar and historian, recorded that the church was originally built in the ninth century AD, but repeated earthquakes in Azarbaijan completely eroded the previous structure. The church was rebuilt during the rule of Shah Abbas the Second.

Saint Mary's Church in Tabriz:

This church was built in the sixth century A.H. (12th century AD) and in his travel chronicles, Marco Polo, the famous Venetian traveler who lived during the eight century A.H. (14th century AD), referred to this church on his way to China. For so many years, Saint Mary's served as the seat of the Azarbaijan Armenian Archbishop. It is a handsomely built edifice, with different annex buildings sprawled on a large area. A board of Armenian peers are governing the well- attended church.

Aside from the above three churches, there are others in Azarbaijan such as the old church built in the eight century A.H. at Modjanbar village, which is some 50 kilometers from Tabriz Another one is the large Saint Sarkis church, situated in Khoy; this building has survived from the time of Shah Abbas the Second (12th century A.H.). During the reign of the said Safavid king, another edifice called the Saint Gevorg (Saint George) church was constructed, using marble stones and designed with a large dome, at Haft Van village near Shapur (Salmas). A church, also with a huge dome, likewise stands at Derishk village in the vicinity of Shapur, in Azarbaijan.

The Saint Tatavous Monastery or the Ghara Kelissa:

Initially, this church comprised of a small hall with a pyramid- shaped dome on the top and 12 crevices similar to the Islamic dome-shaped buildings from the Mongol era. The difference was that the church dome was made of stone. The main part of this pyramid structure followed Byzantine (Eastern Roman) architecture, including the horizontal and parallel fringes made of white and black stones in the interior and black stones on the exterior facing.

Since the facade is dominated by black stones, the church was formerly called the Ghara Kelissa (or black monastery) by the natives. During the reign of the Qajar ruler, Fathalishah, new structures were added to the Saint Tatavous church upon the order of Abbas Mirza, the crown prince, and the governor of Azarbaijan. The renovations resulted in the enlargement of the prayer hall and the small old church was converted into a prayer platform, holding the altar, the holy ornaments and a place where the priest could lead the prayers. The bell tower and the church entrance were situated at one side of the new building, but unfortunately, this part remained unfinished.

Meanwhile, due to border skirmishes and other political disturbances in the area during the succeeding periods, the church was abandoned and ruined. Some minor repairs have been carried out in recent years. Each year, during a special season (in the summer), many Armenians from all parts of Iran travel to this site for prayer and pilgrimage. They come by jeeps or trucks after crossing a very rough mountainous passage. They flock around the church, stay for a few days and perform their religions ceremonies. For the rest of the year, however, the church remains deserted in that remote area.

The additions made to the Saint Tatavous church on the order of Abbas Mirza consist of embossed images of the apostles on the facade and decorations of flowers, bushes, lion and sun figures and arabesques, all of which had been done by Iranian craftsmen. The architecture of the church interior is a combination of Byzantine, Armenian and Georgian designs. Beside the large church, special chambers have been built in the yard to shelter pilgrims and hermits.

Historical Churches at Jolfa of Isfahan:

The most important historical church in Iran is the old cathedral, commonly referred to as the Vank (which means "cathedral" in the Armenian language). This large building was constructed during the reign of Shah Abbas the First and completely reflects Iranian architecture. It has a double-layer brick dome that is very much similar to those built by the Safavids. The interior of the church is decorated with glorious and beautiful paintings and miniature works that represent biblical traditions and the image of angels and apostles, all of which have been executed in a mixture of Iranian and Italian styles. The ceiling and walls are coated with tiles from the Safavid epoch.

At a corner of the large courtyard of the cathedral, offices and halls have been built to accommodate guests, the Esfahan archbishop and his retinue, as well as other important Armenian religious hierarchy in Iran. The church compound also includes a museum that is located in a separate building. The museum displays preserved historical records and relics, and the edicts of Iranian kings dating back to the time of Shah Abbas the First. It also contains an interesting collection of art work.

Esfahan has other historical churches, the most important of which is the Church of Beit-ol Lahm (Bethlehem) at Nazar Avenue. There are also the Saint Mary church at Jolfa Square and the Yerevan church in the Yerevan area.

The Armenian Church in Shiraz:

In the eastern section of Ghaani Avenue, in a district called "Sare Jouye Aramaneh", an interesting building has survived from the era of Shah Abbas the Second. Its principal structure stands in the midst of a garden-like compound and consists of a prayer hall with a lofty flat ceiling and several cells flanking the two side of the building. The ceiling is decorated with original paintings from the Safavid era and the adjoining cells are adorned with niches and arches and plaster molding, also in the Safavid style. This is considered a historical monument at Shiraz and definitely worth a visit. Saint Simon's Church in Shiraz: This is another relatively important, but not so old church in Shiraz. The large hall is completely done in Iranian style while the roof is Roman. Small barrel-shaped vaults, many Iranian art work and stained glass window panes adorn the church.

Meanwhile, another church called the Glory of Christ, stands at Ghalat, 34 kilometers from Shiraz. This building has survived from the Qajar period and is surrounded by charming gardens.

Saint Tatavous Church, Tehran:

This edifice is located at the Chaleh Meidan district, one of the oldest districts in Tehran It stands south of the Seyed Esmail Mausoleum, at the beginning of the northern part of the so-called Armenians' Street. The oldest church of Tehran, it was built during the reign of the Qajar king, Fathalishah. The building has a dome-shaped roof and four alcoves, an altar and a special chair reserved for the Armenian religions leader or prelate. The vestibule leading to the church contains the graves of prominent non-Iranian Christians who have died in Iran, and in the middle of the churchyard, Gribaydof, the Czarist ambassador at the court of Fathalishah, and his companions were laid to rest. They were killed by the revolutionary forces of Tehran at that time.

Meanwhile in Bushehr, there is a church from the Qajar period that is a good specimen of Iranian architecture. All the windows are modeled after old Iranian buildings and the colored panes are purely Iranian art work.

There are also many other churches in Ourumieh, in hamlets surrounding Arasbaran, Ardabil, Maragheh, Naqadeh, Qazvin, Hameadan Khuzestan, Chaharmahal, Arak, in the old Vanak village north of Tehran, etc. These churches, though, are all deserted and are of little artistic significance.

9
posted on 10/19/2004 1:06:49 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Analysis: Iran plays for time in nuclear standoff

WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 (UPI) -- Iran is talking softly while playing for time to build its big nuclear stick.

Iranian leaders Monday said they were prepared to make some concessions to international pressure, led by Europe's major powers to slow down or halt some nuclear programs. But they want to enrich uranium.

Britain, France and Germany are expected this week to offer Iran a package of economic aid in return for a commitment to end nuclear enrichment programs at the newly built Bushehr atomic reactor complex, which would allow the Islamic Republic to rapidly make its own nuclear weapons. Al-Jazeera reported Monday that the Euro-package would include nuclear fuel for Iran's civilian atomic energy programs and a favorable new trade agreement with the 25-nation European Union.

In some respects, the European "Big Three" initiative is a triumph and validation for Iranian diplomacy. Since the U.S. conquest of Iraq, Tehran has prioritized developing and maintaining warm relations with the leading European states to prevent itself becoming diplomatically isolated and, therefore, at Washington's mercy.

However, the Euro-offer may not be enough. One of Iran's top strategists dealing with the West and the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Commission said Monday that Iran was prepared to play ball on some aspects of its nuclear program, but not that crucially important one.

"From a tactical point of view, the discussion on how long to continue the suspension (of some atomic programs) is negotiable," Hassan Rowhani, secretary general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council announced on Iranian national television.

"If the question is that of a suspension for a short period, we can talk about it. But if the question is of depriving Iran of its rights, that is not negotiable and the negotiating team does not have the right to discuss such a thing with the Europeans," he said in comments carried by aljazeera.com.

Iran therefore still seems headed on a collision course with the IAEA and with the Bush administration that could even lead to an outright war with the United States.

In September, the IAEA passed a resolution calling on Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program. The Vienna nuclear body is scheduled to meet to discuss the issue again on Nov. 25. If Iran continues to refuse to comply with its call, it would open the way for a drive led by the United States or the European Union to try and get a U.N. Security Council resolution to condemn Iran. Russia or China or both nations, however, would probably use their veto powers as two of the Security Council's five permanent members to veto U.N. authorization for any extreme action against Tehran.

Publicly, the Bush administration has emphasized its determination to exhaust diplomatic, nonviolent roads to get Iran to abandon its nuclear program. But it has taken no real steps to head off, let alone condemn, Israeli military preparations for an air strike at the Bushehr reactor.

The Israel Air Force has already practiced trial attacks on a scale model of the Bushehr reactor in the Negev desert and as UPI Intelligence Watch has previously reported, U.S. Special Forces in Florida have already practiced war games with the aim of toppling Iran's theocratic Islamic Republic government.

Iranian leaders see the rapid development of their own nuclear deterrent as essential for their regime's survival and the protection of their people. They regard nuclear-armed Israel as their No. 1 enemy and note that under the Bush administration, the U.S. military was used -- and had the capability -- to topple the regime of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in only three weeks with less than 300 soldiers killed in the campaign.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic's founding father, lost at least half a million Iranian lives -- some estimates go as high as a million -- protecting Iran from Iraq during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. The outcome of the 2004 Iraq war, therefore, intensified the fear Iranian leaders already had that they would be at the United States and Israel's mercy if they did not develop their own nuclear weapons as quickly as possible.

Iranian leaders in recent months have publicly warned that they would retaliate with all the force they could muster not just against Israel but also against the United States if the IAF knocked out the Bushehr reactor.

Bush administration policymakers, dominated by hawks who routinely despise the traditional Middle East experts at the State Department, privately dismiss such threats as bravado. They appear to be guided by the historic precedent of the successful Israeli air attack that destroyed Saddam's French-built Osiris nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981 before it could come on line.

But Iran is not Iraq and 2004 is not 1981. Currently, 140,000 over-stretched and exhausted U.S. troops are deployed in neighboring Iraq fighting a rapidly spreading major insurrection that Bush administration planners never anticipated and still have developed no strategy for getting under control.

President George W. Bush has been notably silent on the specifics of what he is going to do about Iraq in his re-election campaign. By contrast, Iranian leaders have not been at all reticent in threatening retaliation against U.S. forces in neighboring Iraq if the United States or Israel attacks their new reactor.

Rowhani's comments therefore suggest the prospects for the European "Big three" initiative succeeding are not good. But if it fails, a very serious confrontation between America and Iran will probably follow very soon.

10
posted on 10/19/2004 1:13:56 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

US warns Iran against any support for Zarqawi

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States warned Iran against providing any type of support to Al-Qaeda-linked foreign militant Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi and his Tawhid wal Jihad (Unity and Holy War) group, saying such backing would be a "very, very serious matter."

The State Department declined to comment on allegations of an Iran-Zarqawi link, first claimed last week by Iraq (news - web sites)'s interim national intelligence chief Mohammed al-Shahwani and then reported by Newsweek magazine, but said Washington remained deeply concerned about Tehran's activity in Iraq.

"All I would be able to say (about the accusations) is that we have generally been very concerned about some of the reports of Iranian activity in Iraq," spokesman Richard Boucher said.

"We have frequently discussed these in public, as well as made clear, I think, to others what our concerns were so that the Iranians would know exactly what our concerns were about possible support for different groups inside Iraq," he told reporters.

"The Iraqi interim government has also been quite vocal both directly with the Iranians and in their statements with others about the concerns about Iran so it remains an issue, a very serious concern," Boucher said.

"And were it to be found that Iran was providing particular support for this terrorist group, obviously that would be a very, very serious matter," he said, referring to the Tawhid wal Jihad, which the United States formally designated a "foreign terrorist organization" on Friday.

Shahwani, the Iraqi intelligence chief, told AFP last week that he believed Iran, through its embassy in Baghdad, was masterminding an assassination campaign that has seen nearly 20 of his agents killed since the middle of last month.

He said raids on Iranian "safe houses" in Baghdad had uncovered documents linking Iran to plots to kill members of the intelligence service and using the Badr former militia of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq's (SCIRI) as its tool.

SCIRI has vigorously denied the allegations and counter-charged that the intelligence service is full of veterans of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s military who are now renewing their vendetta against former Shiite resistance groups based out of Iran in the 1980s.

But Shahwani said that since mid-September, 18 Iraqi intelligence agents have been killed in Iraq, 10 of them by the Badr organisation on orders from Iran and the rest by Zarqawi, including two that were beheaded last week.

He said he suspected Tehran was funding the Jordanian-born Zarqawi, but lacked conclusive proof.

Newsweek on Sunday cited sources close to Jordanian intelligence as saying Zarqawi had traveled back and forth between Iraq and Iran several times since Saddam Hussein's ouster and had established a high-level relationship with at least some Iranian officials.

11
posted on 10/19/2004 1:16:11 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Conflict with Iran is Inevitable.

We are now entering a very dangerous phase in our twenty-five year struggle with Iran.

Iran must stop President Bush from being reelected. They fear that President Bush will actively support a regime change in Iran in his second term. They must stop him.

A Kerry administration has already announced that it will seek a thaw in US/Iranian relations and will almost certainly follow down the path that President Jimmy Carter took which is a policy of appeasement. If they can succeed in ensuring the election of John Kerry as president, Iran is destined to be the super power in the Middle East and once a nuclear power, far more deadly.

I am hearing from multiple intelligence sources that Iran, Al Qaeda and their associates are planning a massive attack on the US or our troops before the November election.

Personally, I believe that Iraq or Afghanistan are more tempting targets for these terrorists since a massive and very deadly attack in Baghdad or other such sites could shift public opinion against the war in Iraq and towards John Kerry, while an attack on the US homeland will likely remind Americans that we are at war and thus need to re-elect President Bush.

But recent successes in Iraq are making their plans much more difficult to execute. I am hearing that Zarqawi has been severely weakened and that is why he has now pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda. He needs their help. This requires Iran who is protecting Al Qaeda leadership to be much more active in any such attack.

Whatever these terror masters are planning, it will be critical that the world understands who was behind these attacks, Al Qaeda and Iran. This is why the US is warning Iran not to support Zarqawi.

It also appears the US is increasing our attacks on Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq in order to put the insurgents on the defensive and keep them from launching a successful coordinated offensive against us. Sadly I am hearing that the terrorists are confident that their attack will succeed. These terrorist are just awaiting the signal to execute their attack.

But since Iran is much more likely to be directly involved in the coming attack it puts them at greater risk of being exposed. Still, they are skilled at letting others take the responsibility for such attacks, just as they did with the bombings in Spain.

I also hear that Iran may not fear this exposure because they believe that the Islamic world will believe any evidence we bring forth to show Iran's involvement in the attack as just a US/CIA fabrication.

The next days or weeks are likely to prove crucial to our success in the war on terror.

12
posted on 10/19/2004 2:31:37 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

In September the IAEA called on Iran to "immediately" widen its suspension of uranium enrichment to include all uranium enrichment-related activities, which it has so far refused to do so.

Iran faces a November 25 deadline, after which it risks being referred to the UN Security Council for further action.

"Iran faces a clear choice," MacShane said.

"It can choose to live up to its commitments, comply in full with the (IAEA) board's resolutions, including by putting in place a full and lasting suspension and reap the benefits of the international confidence this would create.

"Or it can spurn the chance to reassure the international community."

He added: "In that case the board will need to discuss additional measures, including very probably referral to the UN Security Council."

16
posted on 10/19/2004 10:08:53 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

UK, Germany to Iran: Suspend nuclear program

The foreign ministers of Britain and Germany on Tuesday urged Iran to indefinitely suspend its nuclear program and avoid a showdown next month with the U.N. nuclear agency.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and his German counterpart Joschka Fischer said the international community lacked confidence in Iran, which last year agreed to suspend uranium enrichment, but has since resumed testing, assembling and making centrifuges used in the process.

"Iran has yet to give us the confidence we need about its intentions," Straw said at a joint news conference. "We cannot go on indefinitely but Iran could still give us that confidence by introducing an indefinite suspension of its enrichment and processing activities."

Iran says its nuclear program is devoted entirely to peaceful purposes, including generating electricity and a leading scientist said Tuesday his country would not give up its right to nuclear technology.

Fischer urged Iran to continue working with France, Britain and Germany to resolve the issue.

"We are very concerned abut the developments and I think it is very important that there is not a miscalculation in Tehran," Fischer said.

While the United States, which argues that Iran has secret plans to build atomic weapons, wants the matter referred to the U.N. Security Council, Britain, France and Germany have spearheaded efforts to find a diplomatic solution.

In October last year, the three countries jointly persuaded Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment and give inspectors unrestricted access to its nuclear facilities.

The three countries say Iran has failed to fulfill its pledge. But ahead of the IAEA board meeting in Vienna, Austria on Nov. 25, they intend to offer Iran a package of economic incentives, including nuclear fuel for civil use, and a trade agreement, to encourage compliance.

"We hope very much this matter can be resolved finally within the board of governors and not be referred to the Security Council but only time will tell," said Straw.

Fischer urged Tehran to "stick to the agreement" they made. "This is the only way I think which could produce positive results," he added.

Gholamreza Aghazadeh, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said Tuesday Iran was interested in buying nuclear fuel from the West, but would not give up its right to a nuclear fuel cycle.

"We may purchase fuel from the West and develop its technology. We have not rejected the West's fuel proposal, but not losing our right to the technology is the point," state-run Tehran television quoted him as saying.

17
posted on 10/19/2004 10:27:16 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Stop Them!

October 19, 2004 Iran va Jahan Koorosh Afshar

The mullahs of the Islamic Republic have, at several times, shown their thirst for carnage in the past 25 years of ruling over Iran . They have a long history of plotting suicide attacks and waging wars internationally and silencing any opposing voice domestically. Having brutalized the Iranian nation all throughout these years, having kept most of the people under the poverty line, one shouldn't be astonished on how these "men of Allah" have had absolutely no problem finding recruits and sending poor souls after the so-called promised paradise through shedding the blood of other humans. If you are an Iranian, it wouldn't be very strange for you to have at least one dear and near lost at the bloody hands of these shopkeepers of religion. The infamousness of the Shiite clerics of Iran is not a new story to be told over again, as they are already known to the world as the "bad guys".

The reason for writing this article is, however, not retelling the same old story, but an untold one, I am sure you haven't heard yet.

Almost a month ago the Supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's appointed judge in the province of "Mazandaran", in the South of the Caspian sea , sentenced "Atefeh Rajabi" a 16-year-old girl to death for committing adultery. The poor girl, deprived of even the very basic motherly love, was hanged in the public before the dismayed eyes of a people who have long forgotten that they were no more living than "Atefeh" was now. Just before she was hanged, "Atefeh" had willed everything she possessed to the poor girls like herself. A short time later, it was revealed that the Islamic judge and a few of his men had raped this little girl before hanging her.

The tragedy of "Atefeh" was still inflicting its heavy and painful burden on the Iranians' conscience that a report came out proclaiming that another girl, 13-year-old "Zheela", was sentenced to "stoning to death" by another Islamic judge in the city of "Marivan", Western Iran. This poor child is sentenced to death because she has been impregnated by her 15-year-old brother.

I am deeply astounded by the level of some of your politicians' credulity speaking of peace and a "better tomorrow" while they see that Islamic fundamentalism is literally marring the fresh minds of future parents of our world. Can't they see what is happening to "Zheela"? Couldn't they see what happened in "Beslan"? Can't they see us? Having been brought up in an "Islamiorated" society where seeing coffins and wild mobs in our streets was an everyday experience I don't really know how many years should pass before we will be able to gain our mental health back.

If the world cannot save little "Zheela" from these brutal Islamic militants, then how could your politicians speak of disarming them from their nuclear weapons?

Saving her is undoubtedly the right thing to do.

Let us not forget that "It may not always be easy, convenient, or politically correct to stand for truth and right, but it is the right thing to do - Always."

- Koorosh Afshar is a pseudonym for a university student in Tehran , his name has been changed for his protection.

18
posted on 10/19/2004 10:30:08 AM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - The head of Iran's security council said on Tuesday the re-election of President Bush was in Tehran's best interests, despite the administration's axis of evil label, accusations that Iran harbors al-Qaida terrorists and threats of sanctions over the country's nuclear ambitions.

Historically, Democrats have harmed Iran more than Republicans, said Hasan Rowhani, head of the Supreme National Security Council, Iran's top security decision-making body.

"We haven't seen anything good from Democrats," Rowhani told state-run television in remarks that, for the first time in recent decades, saw Iran openly supporting one U.S. presidential candidate over another.

"We should not forget that most sanctions and economic pressures were imposed on Iran during the time of Clinton," Rowhani said of the former Democratic president. "And we should not forget that during Bush's era - despite his hard-line and baseless rhetoric against Iran - he didn't take, in practical terms, any dangerous action against Iran."

Though Iran generally does not publicly wade into U.S. presidential politics, it has a history of preferring Republicans over Democrats, who tend to press human rights issues.

"We do not desire to see Democrats take over," Rowhani said when asked if Iran was supporting Kerry against Bush.

The United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran after militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979 and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. Iranian clerics were crucial in determining the fate of the 1980 U.S. election when Republican Ronald Reagan won in part because Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter was unable to secure the hostages' release.

The hostages were freed as Reagan was inaugurated.

The United States supported Iraq in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, but by the late 1990s, U.S.-Iranian relations were somewhat better. They plummeted again after Bush accused Iran of being part of the "axis of evil" with North Korea and prewar Iraq.

The Bush administration also accuses Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons and sheltering operatives of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terror network. Still, Iran was happy to see Bush destroy two big regional enemies - the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

Iranian political analyst Mohsen Mofidi said ousting the Taliban and Saddam was the "biggest service any administration could have done for Iran."

And Bush, he said, has learned from his mistakes.

"The experience of two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the responsibility Bush had, will make it a very remote possibility for him to risk attacking a much bigger and more powerful country like Iran," he said.

Mofidi added that "Democrats usually insist on human rights and they will have more excuses to pressure Iran."

Republican and Democratic presidents have issued executive orders against Iran, with Reagan in 1987 barring Iranian crude oil and other imports, and Clinton in 1995 banning U.S. trade and investment in Iran.

Bush has been reluctant to offer Iran any incentives for better U.S.-Iranian relations, but in recent days there have been signs Washington will back European economic incentives if Iran stops uranium enrichment activities.

Gholamreza Aghazadeh, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, was quoted by state-run television Tuesday as saying Iran is interested in buying nuclear fuel from the West, but will not concede its right to the technology.

The nuclear issue has been most sensitive, and the Bush administration is threatening to press for sanctions against Iran over it. Washington accuses Tehran of trying to build bombs. Tehran says its nuclear ambitions are peaceful, for energy purposes.

Kerry, who says halting nuclear proliferation will be a priority if he becomes president, believes Bush should have done more diplomatically to curb Iran's alleged nuclear weapons ambitions. He says Iran should be offered nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, but spent fuel should be taken back so it cannot be used to develop nuclear weapons.

Kavoos Emami, another Iranian political analyst, praised Kerry for mentioning the need for dialogue with Iran, and said the Democrat would be better for Iran.

"Bush has insulted Iran more than any other U.S. administration. If Kerry is elected, a U.S. military attack against Iran will never happen or will be a very remote possibility," he said.

Europe offers Iran technology

From correspondents in Vienna, AustriaOctober 20, 2004

EUROPE'S three main nations are ready to promise Iran nuclear technology, including supplying a light-water nuclear reactor, if Tehran takes steps to show it is not secretly trying to make atomic weapons, according to a confidential document obtained by AFP today.

"We would support the acquisition by Iran of a light water research reactor," said the document presented by Britain, France and Germany to major Western nations ahead of a meeting of the so-called Euro-3 with Iran that may happen on Friday in Vienna.

The document, presented to the G8 group of industrialised nations last week in Washington, outlines the EU3 position "in the run up" to a meeting November 25 of the UN nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency that is expected to finally decide whether Iran is cooperating or not with the IAEA.

20
posted on 10/19/2004 2:47:58 PM PDT
by DoctorZIn
(Until they are Free, "We shall all be Iranians!")

Ayatollah Ali-Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani said in an 18 October meeting with parliamentarians and other officials that new people must enter the political scene, ISNA reported. Addressing the Iran Specialists Association (Majma-yi Motakhasesan-i Iran) and several parliamentary representatives, he said, "The interests of the state necessitate that the world should feel that Iran has the potential to produce capable individuals." Hashemi-Rafsanjani indicated that he would serve as president again (he was president in 1989-97) only with great reluctance: "I am a soldier of the revolution and I am willing to spend the rest of my life serving the revolution and Islam," Hashemi-Rafsanjani said. "I am quite prepared to serve in any position that the state and people feel I will be of some use. However, I prefer other honest and capable individuals to assume the responsibilities of the chief executive." Hashemi-Rafsanjani added that the current international and domestic climates make the management of the country difficult. BS

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.